2010Unpublished venueRequires access

Individual disputes at the workplace: Alternative disputes resolution

John Purcell

Open publisher page 15 citations

Abstract

This report examines the use of alternative disputes resolution (ADR) as a means of settling individual workplace disputes before they go to a court hearing. The report begins with a broad definition of ADR, which involves the methods of conciliation, mediation and arbitration, further distinguishing between judicial and non-judicial forms of ADR. It goes on to examine the trends in ADR use and how workers gain access to such services. This is followed by an overview of people providing ADR services and a brief synopsis of social partner views on such procedures. The report concludes that while ADR usage is growing across Europe, it varies between individual countries. In general, ADR appears to be most successful in resolving ambiguous and complex disputes. Attitudes towards ADR seem to be becoming more positive, with advocates viewing it as a more speedy and cost-effective alternative to court proceedings.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

This report examines the use of alternative disputes resolution (ADR) as a means of settling individual workplace disputes before they go to a court hearing. The report begins with a broad definition of ADR, which involves the methods of conciliation, mediation and arbitration, further distinguishing between judicial and non-judicial forms of ADR. It goes on to examine the trends in ADR use and how workers gain access to such services. This is followed by an overview of people providing ADR services and a brief synopsis of social partner views on such procedures. The report concludes that while ADR usage is growing across Europe, it varies between individual countries. In general, ADR appears to be most successful in resolving ambiguous and complex disputes. Attitudes towards ADR seem to be becoming more positive, with advocates viewing it as a more speedy and cost-effective alternative to court proceedings.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 15 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

This report examines the use of alternative disputes resolution (ADR) as a means of settling individual workplace disputes before they go to a court hearing. The report begins with a broad definition of ADR, which involves the methods of conciliation, mediation and arbitration, further distinguishing between judicial and non-judicial forms of ADR. It goes on to examine the trends in ADR use and how workers gain access to such services. This is followed by an overview of people providing ADR services and a brief synopsis of social partner views on such procedures. The report concludes that while ADR usage is growing across Europe, it varies between individual countries. In general, ADR appears to be most successful in resolving ambiguous and complex disputes. Attitudes towards ADR seem to be becoming more positive, with advocates viewing it as a more speedy and cost-effective alternative to court proceedings.

Key concepts: Conciliation, Alternative dispute resolution, Arbitration, Mediation, Dispute resolution, Online dispute resolution, Political science, Law

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Individual disputes at the workplace: Alternative disputes resolution — Research Paper | ScholarLens